Apparently mathman hasn't been able to find it......yet. But it's only been 15 hours and maybe he's been busy - or it is really well hidden.
ISU is good at keeping certain things out of the public eye.

But I doubt that any judges or tech panel members have been dismissed for bad scoring or calls in the CoP era.

It's more likely several discredited judges and federation heads that were kicked out during the 6.0 era have been reinstated.

But what the heck - a couple of them were close friends with Cinquanta

I'm just puzzled: In general, when people talk about an individual person, it is perceived as unacceptable to attack individuals. But when the individuals formed an organization, these organizations which are run by individuals, such as ISU, the judges, USFSA, Skate Canada, French Federation, and Russian Federation, have become devil and are ok to attack without mercy. Why is that?

Individuals feel powerless in the face of official organizations and feel that dehumanizing and demonizing those organizations is a means of asserting their power as individuals?

This may be especially true for organizations (e.g., government, huge corporations) that seem to hold a lot of power over our lives -- or in the case of skating federations, power over the individual skaters we enjoy identifying with. Also skating officials stand in judgment over those skaters' performances, so defying them feels like resisting being judged.

Individuals feel powerless in the face of official organizations and feel that dehumanizing and demonizing those organizations is a means of asserting their power as individuals?

This may be especially true for organizations (e.g., government, huge corporations) that seem to hold a lot of power over our lives -- or in the case of skating federations, power over the individual skaters we enjoy identifying with. Also skating officials stand in judgment over those skaters' performances, so defying them feels like resisting being judged.

That's my theory, anyway.

Another theory might be those who blindly follow without questioning might as well live in a totalitarian state.

Apparently mathman hasn't been able to find it......yet. But it's only been 15 hours and maybe he's been busy - or it is really well hidden.

Still looking.

It is somewhat of a chore to find things on the ISU site because you have to comb through the list of old ISU Communications. The search feature is not as helpful as it might be. It is usually easier just to use Google.

Anyway, here is an old "summary" of action by the ISU judges' oversight committee. (Scroll down to paragraph 11, page 5.)

I believe that this kind of summary is the only information that is made public.. We do not know the names of the individual judges. An "Assessment 3" is the worst and carries some sort of penalty more than just a reprimand or warning.

Judges and officials also face discipline for breaking various breaches of the ethical code. Last year two Swedish judges who were sisters both served at the same event (the men's novice competition at the Hague last year). One sister was a judge and the other was the referee, in violation of the rule that related people cannot serve as both judges and governing officials. The referee was suspended for one year from refereeing.

The ISU does publish every year the list of judges who accrue enough "anomalies' (marks outside the corridor) to be called on the carpet for some sort of discipline. I will try to find the latest such report on the ISU site, but it requires some effort.

Typically about a dozen or so judges face some sort of reprimand each season and some serve suspensions during which they cannot judge ISU events, combined with retraining.

I suspect that Mathman is talking about a more specific list, but ISU Communication 1742 from June 2012 gives the number of "Assessments (warnings)" issued to officials.
This page has a link to the PDF for Communication 1742: http://isu.sportcentric.net/db/isu_f...q=1742&x=0&y=0
I've copied below excerpts from pp. 9-10 of the PDF.

12. Summary of Figure Skating Officials Evaluation 2011/2012
During the 2011/12 season the Assessments (warnings) were determined jointly by the assigned Officials Assessment Commission members and by the Technical Committees. The Council reviewed and ratified the following Assessments:

Total season 2010/11: 14 Assessments
Total season 2009/10: 24 Assessments
Total season 2008/09: 16 Assessments
Total season 2007/08: 12 Assessments
Total season 2006/07: 13 Assessments
Total season 2005/06: 29 Assessments
Total season 2004/05**: 42 Assessments
Total season 2003/04**: 20 Assessments
Total season 2002/03*: 11 Assessments

Total season 2010/11: 13 Assessments
Total season 2009/10: 17 Assessments
Total season 2008/09: 11 Assessments
Total season 2007/08: 21 Assessments
Total season 2006/07: 20 Assessments
Total season 2005/06: 25 Assessments
Total season 2004/05**: 56 Assessments
Total season 2003/04**: 9 Assessments
Total season 2002/03*: 4 Assessments

* = Assessments based on the previous 6.0 based Judging System.
** = Assessments based partly on the ISU Judging System, partly on the previous 6.0 based Judging System.

The concerned Officials have been notified about the Assessments by letter and through their Members.

It is somewhat of a chore to find things on the ISU site because you have to comb through the list of old ISU Communications. The search feature is not as helpful as it might be. It is usually easier just to use Google.

Anyway, here is an old "summary" of action by the ISU judges' oversight committee. (Scroll down to paragraph 11, page 5.)

I believe that this kind of summary is the only information that is made public.. We do not know the names of the individual judges. An "Assessment 3" is the worst and carries some sort of penalty more than just a reprimand or warning.

Sorry, Mathman ... I was busily composing my post above when you posted the link to ISU Communication 1570.
Communication 1742 that I cited is a more recent version of the same summary.

Judges and officials also face discipline for breaking various breaches of the ethical code. Last year two Swedish judges who were sisters both served at the same event (the men's novice competition at the Hague last year). One sister was a judge and the other was the referee, in violation of the rule that related people cannot serve as both judges and governing officials. The referee was suspended for one year from refereeing.

Interesting that one sister is suspended from ref duties for a year but not from judging. Pretty much a light slap on the wrist -but maybe it was an innocent mistake and the sisters might have a good reputation and otherwise clean record.

If assessmnet three is serious what are the penalties associated with it? A fine or suspension? Maybe it is determined on a case by case basis?

The procedures are explained in great detail, but not the penalties. Section I says that the most extreme situation (Assessment level 4) carries penalties of "demotion or suspension." Demotion could mean something like, you can still judge lesser events but not ISU championships.

The whole process is under the direction of the Vice President for Figure Skating (David Dore, CAN), and final decisions are made by the ISU council. My impression is that specific penalties are assigned on a case by case basis.

Note the provision that everyone involved in the evaluation procedure is sworn to silence about particular individuals. I guess they don't want to air their laundry in public.

I also see that the typical ISU judge is paid 40 Euros per day for service at ISU championships, plus a bonus of 500 Euros at the end of the year. They have to pay it back if they are demoted or suspended at the end of the season.

I also see that the typical ISU judge is paid 40 Euros per day for service at ISU championships, plus a bonus of 500 Euros at the end of the year. They have to pay it back if they are demoted or suspended at the end of the season.

You get what you pay for.......

The more successful sports would struggle to get by without having well paid and highly competent refs and judges.
Most Americans saw what happened when the NFL tried to play with less experienced/amateur refs.

In fact the pressure became so great after a series of blunders that the NFL gave the real refs everything they were asking for.

To think poor officiating does not effect the popularity of a sport is silly.

If it might be true the judges do the best they can it might still be in skating's best long term interest to pay for highly trained professional refs and judges.

What is more important to a judged sport - than the quality of the judges?
Any sport will struggle if the public perception is that the officiating and judging lacks expertise and integrity.

I'm just puzzled: In general, when people talk about an individual person, it is perceived as unacceptable to attack individuals. But when the individuals formed an organization, these organizations which are run by individuals, such as ISU, the judges, USFSA, Skate Canada, French Federation, and Russian Federation, have become devil and are ok to attack without mercy. Why is that?

The more successful sports would struggle to get by without having well paid and highly competent refs and judges.
Most Americans saw what happened when the NFL tried to play with less experienced/amateur refs.

In fact the pressure became so great after a series of blunders that the NFL gave the real refs everything they were asking for.

There are a LOT of significant differences between the ISU and the NFL, so other than the general point that professional officials would do a better job, there isn't much scope for comparison between the two organizations. Soccer, being a worldwide sport, or tennis, which like skating is also competed by individuals and duos rather than location-affiliated large teams, might make better models. I confess I have no idea about how those sports manage their corps of officials.

Still, I'm curious about the skating judging corps could be professionalized . . . How we would get there from here would be a whole other level of complication to address later, once we know where "there" is.

Let's say the ISU adopts a policy of hiring professional judges accountable directly to the ISU with no national affiliations (although obviously everyone comes from somewhere).

There are several tiers of international events for which the ISU might hire officials:

ISU championships and Olympic Games (4 or 5 large events per year)

Grand Prix (7 small events per year) and any other elite invitational events such as Japan Open that they might sponsor themselves or approve if sponsored by national federations

Junior Grand Prix and the major "senior B" events

Figure skating included in regional and/or age-limited international multi-sport festivals such as Youth Olympic Games, World University Games, Asian Games, etc.

Competitions hosted by national federations or even local clubs that are open skaters from countries outside the host federation, that may combine senior, junior, novice, and lower level events

And then there are national championships, qualifiers for national championships in larger federations, and local club events --some of of them attracting only or mostly low-level skaters -- that do not include foreign competitors and would not be expected to rely on international judges

So which of these competition tiers should require only professional judges? Would there be enough such competitions to sustain several professional judges from each continent/region that has skaters competing at that level, at a livable yearly salary in addition to travel expenses? Or would they be paid moderate fees per event, traveling around the world every week or two during the height of the season, and need other sources of income to sustain them the rest of the year? Would there be any prohibitions on what other professions a professional judge could engage in (e.g., coaching, even if only at a beginner level, or even if only many years ago)?

Which events might use mostly lower-level amateur judges and also invite international pro judges to participate? Would the organizing committees have to pay salaries as well as expenses to the pro judges? Would the pro judges be allowed to volunteer their time if they choose to judge at a local competition near where they live?

Which events would rely only on volunteer officials -- maybe not even be allowed to use professionals even if they could afford it?

Would large federations tend to use only or mostly professional judges who live in easy travel distance for their national championships and other important domestic events?

What would be the pathway from domestic amateur to professional international judge?

How many tiers of international appointments would there be (comparable to the current "International" and "ISU" judging appointments)? To what extent, if any, would national federations be involved in shaping a would-be professional judge's pathway into that career?

Should international competition circuits also be restructured at the same time that the judging corps is restructured?

All details that would need to be figured out -- at least the basics before any attempt to transition to a professionalized system.